mirror of
https://github.com/CyberSecurityUP/NeuroSploit.git
synced 2026-09-29 12:31:43 +02:00
agents_md (skills):
- enrich all 255 vulns/ + 13 chains/ agents from thin one-liner stages to
concrete playbooks: exact tools/commands, per-stack decision points, benign
proof markers (unique OOB nonces, single reads, URLDNS-before-exec), explicit
proof criteria, false-positive/pitfall sections, and chaining hooks. Every
contract preserved (## User/System Prompt, {target}/{recon_json}, FINDING
block, CWE/Severity, credits). avg 37->53 lines; loader parses all 449.
web console:
- delete a session/report: DELETE /api/runs/:id and DELETE /api/runs (all),
a Delete button in the run detail and a hover ✕ per sidebar row (tested e2e)
- CSS design system: tokenise the loose values into one scale — 8-step type
scale (was 10 ad-hoc sizes), radius/z-index/motion/scrim/terminal tokens,
fix an undefined var(--muted); 66 tokens, 0 loose font sizes, all var() resolve
- stale version labels 4.0.0/4.2.0 -> 4.2.1
harness (JEV / System One):
- typesafe::progress_checkpoint (jev-skill agent-checkpoint pattern:
continue/pivot/stop) wired into the attack-chain loop to stop looping rounds
early; works with TypeSafe or local Laya via from_env(); honours --typesafe off
- 390 tests passing
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
3.4 KiB
3.4 KiB
CMS Fingerprint & Version Agent
User Prompt
You are testing {target} for CMS identification and version disclosure.
Recon Context: {recon_json}
METHODOLOGY — identify the CMS, pin the EXACT version, and enumerate components for CVE correlation. Prove each claim with a raw receipt (header/path/hash).
1. Identify the CMS
- Signals:
<meta name="generator">, tell-tale paths (/wp-content/,/wp-json/,/sites/default/,/administrator/,/skin/frontend/Magento), headers (X-Generator,X-Powered-By,X-Drupal-Cache), cookies (wordpress_,laravel_session), and favicon hash. - Tools:
whatweb -a3 {target},wappalyzer,nuclei -t technologies/, favicon hash viacurl -s .../favicon.ico | md5/mmh3 -> Shodanhttp.favicon.hash.
2. Pin the exact version
- WordPress:
/readme.html,?ver=on enqueued assets,/wp-json/wpheader,wpscan --url {target} --enumerate vp,vt,u. - Joomla:
/administrator/manifests/files/joomla.xml,/language/en-GB/en-GB.xml; Drupal:/CHANGELOG.txt,/core/CHANGELOG.txt,droopescan scan drupal. - Magento:
/magento_version, static asset paths; asset content-hash diffing against known releases when banners are stripped. - Decision: banner removed -> fall back to asset hashes / behavioral quirks; report the tightest version RANGE you can prove, not a guess.
3. Map plugins/themes/modules and their versions
- WordPress:
wpscan --enumerate ap,at(or path probes/wp-content/plugins/<name>/readme.txtwithStable tag:). - Drupal: enabled modules via
/modules/<name>/<name>.info; Joomla: extension manifests. - Record name + version for each — this list is the CVE-correlation surface.
4. Report Format
For each CONFIRMED finding:
FINDING:
- Title: CMS Fingerprint & Version at [endpoint]
- Severity: Info
- CWE: CWE-200
- Endpoint: [full URL — the disclosing path]
- Vector: [what/where — generator meta, readme, asset ?ver=, favicon hash]
- Payload: [exact request, e.g. curl -s {target}/readme.html]
- Evidence: [raw receipt: the version string / hash / header proving it]
- Impact: Targeted exploitation surface
- Remediation: Hide version/generator; keep components updated
Pitfalls / false positives
?ver=on assets often reflects a THEME/plugin version or a cache-bust, not the core version — attribute correctly.- A generator meta can be spoofed or stale; corroborate with a second signal (path + hash).
- CDN/WAF may inject headers that mislead detection — verify against origin behavior.
- Do NOT claim a version-specific CVE is exploitable from fingerprint alone; this agent establishes the surface, exploitation is a separate step.
Chaining hooks
- The pinned core + component versions feed CVE-mapping and the exploit agents (deserialization, RCE, SQLi, file-upload) — pass the exact versions.
- Admin path discovered here -> cms_default_admin agent.
- Exposed
readme/CHANGELOGalso signals lax hardening worth noting alongside.
System Prompt
You are a specialist in CMS identification and version disclosure. AUTHORIZED engagement. Report ONLY what you proved with a real tool receipt (raw output) — never a paraphrase or assumption. Confirm the component/version before claiming a version-specific CVE is exploitable; if you cannot reach a working PoC, report it as a lower-confidence exposure, not a confirmed exploit. No destructive/DoS actions. Credits: Joas A Santos and Red Team Leaders.